KarstBase a bibliography database in karst and cave science.
Featured articles from Cave & Karst Science Journals
Characterization of minothems at Libiola (NW Italy): morphological, mineralogical, and geochemical study, Carbone Cristina; Dinelli Enrico; De Waele Jo
Chemistry and Karst, White, William B.
The karst paradigm: changes, trends and perspectives, Klimchouk, Alexander
Long-term erosion rate measurements in gypsum caves of Sorbas (SE Spain) by the Micro-Erosion Meter method, Sanna, Laura; De Waele, Jo; Calaforra, José Maria; Forti, Paolo
The use of damaged speleothems and in situ fault displacement monitoring to characterise active tectonic structures: an example from Zapadni Cave, Czech Republic , Briestensky, Milos; Stemberk, Josef; Rowberry, Matt D.;
Featured articles from other Geoscience Journals
Karst environment, Culver D.C.
Mushroom Speleothems: Stromatolites That Formed in the Absence of Phototrophs, Bontognali, Tomaso R.R.; D’Angeli Ilenia M.; Tisato, Nicola; Vasconcelos, Crisogono; Bernasconi, Stefano M.; Gonzales, Esteban R. G.; De Waele, Jo
Calculating flux to predict future cave radon concentrations, Rowberry, Matt; Marti, Xavi; Frontera, Carlos; Van De Wiel, Marco; Briestensky, Milos
Microbial mediation of complex subterranean mineral structures, Tirato, Nicola; Torriano, Stefano F.F;, Monteux, Sylvain; Sauro, Francesco; De Waele, Jo; Lavagna, Maria Luisa; D’Angeli, Ilenia Maria; Chailloux, Daniel; Renda, Michel; Eglinton, Timothy I.; Bontognali, Tomaso Renzo Rezio
Evidence of a plate-wide tectonic pressure pulse provided by extensometric monitoring in the Balkan Mountains (Bulgaria), Briestensky, Milos; Rowberry, Matt; Stemberk, Josef; Stefanov, Petar; Vozar, Jozef; Sebela, Stanka; Petro, Lubomir; Bella, Pavel; Gaal, Ludovit; Ormukov, Cholponbek;
Journal of Sedimentary Research, 1961, Vol 31, Issue 3, p. 275-287
Breccia and Pennsylvanian cave filling in Mississippian Saint Louis Limestone, Putnam County, Indiana
Smith Ned Myron, Sunderman Jack Allen, Melhorn Wilton Newton,
Abstract:
A limestone breccia and several bodies of shale and sandstone in Mississippian St. Louis limestone were discovered in a quarry opened during the summer of 1959 in the SE1/4NW1/4 sec. 15, T.15N., R.4W., Putnam County. A small mass of sandy limestone conglomerate overlay part of the breccia. Nearly all these bodies have been removed in quarrying. The breccia and the shale-sandstone masses appear to have originated from 2 separate geologic processes which occurred at 2 different times. The origin of the breccia is in doubt because not enough critical evidence is available to prove conclusively and single origin. The authors believe, however, that the breccia probably is the product of a submarine rock slump during St. Louis time which was triggered by the tectonic activity that initiated early movements along the Mt. Carmel fault. Other possible origins, such as solution of evaporites accompanied by collapse of overlying rock or formation of caves in a karst terrain followed by roof collapse, are not supported by the evidence observed. The shale-sandstone bodies are believed to be rocks of Pennsylvanian age which were deposited in caverns developed during the Mississippian-Pennsylvanian erosion interval. The limestone conglomerate is probably of the same age as the shale-sandstone bodies
A limestone breccia and several bodies of shale and sandstone in Mississippian St. Louis limestone were discovered in a quarry opened during the summer of 1959 in the SE1/4NW1/4 sec. 15, T.15N., R.4W., Putnam County. A small mass of sandy limestone conglomerate overlay part of the breccia. Nearly all these bodies have been removed in quarrying. The breccia and the shale-sandstone masses appear to have originated from 2 separate geologic processes which occurred at 2 different times. The origin of the breccia is in doubt because not enough critical evidence is available to prove conclusively and single origin. The authors believe, however, that the breccia probably is the product of a submarine rock slump during St. Louis time which was triggered by the tectonic activity that initiated early movements along the Mt. Carmel fault. Other possible origins, such as solution of evaporites accompanied by collapse of overlying rock or formation of caves in a karst terrain followed by roof collapse, are not supported by the evidence observed. The shale-sandstone bodies are believed to be rocks of Pennsylvanian age which were deposited in caverns developed during the Mississippian-Pennsylvanian erosion interval. The limestone conglomerate is probably of the same age as the shale-sandstone bodies